AIHawk vs browser-use

browser-use is much bigger: 112.3k stars against 30.3k.

browser-use leads on customization and privacy and model freedom. AIHawk does not take any axis by a clear margin.

Stars and commit dates come from our own daily tracking. The six axes are read off each project's documentation by our review pipeline, so they describe what a project says about itself, not what we measured in its code.

Where they stand today

Drives a real, patched Firefox browser over MCP or OpenRouter so the agent can click, type and read actual web pages for automation rather than relying on APIs or scraped data.

Stars
30.3k
Tracked growth
not tracked long enough
Maturity
Last commit
9h ago
Language
Python
License
MIT
Cost to run
Your OpenRouter API key or assistant-provided model

An open-source browser agent that runs locally and is extensible with custom tools and provider‑prefixed models, enabling reproducible, privacy-friendly web automation.

Stars
112.3k
Tracked growth
+6.9%
Maturity
Last commit
4h ago
Language
Python
License
MIT
Cost to run
Your LLM API key (or run free local models).

Six axes, head to head

Each axis runs 0 to 5. The label under a score is what that project's own docs claim, not a category average.

AxisAIHawkbrowser-use
Context depth
How much of your codebase it sees before it answers: the open diff, the diff plus related files, or the whole repository.
No repo access
Diff only
Noise control
How it keeps output volume down — severity thresholds, deduplication, incremental runs over new commits only.
None mentioned
None mentioned
Customization
How far it bends to your team: custom rules, prompts, style guides, per-path config.
Config & flags
Custom tools & prompts
Privacy
Whether your code stays on your own infrastructure: fully local, self-hostable, or cloud API only.
Cloud API key
Fully local capable
Model freedom
Whether you can point it at any provider, or it is wired to one.
OpenRouter / MCP
Bring-your-own / local
Setup ease
What it takes to get a first useful run out of it.
Config + API key
API key + install

Which one to pick

Pick AIHawk if…

Real browser automation — pick AIHawk when you need an agent that interacts with complex web pages (mouse, keyboard, real page rendering) and can integrate with your assistant or OpenRouter.

Runs in cli, web-app, ide. Works with byok, anthropic, gemini.

Pick browser-use if…

Open-source & flexible — pick any LLM (including local models), add custom tools, and run browser automation on your machine.

  • Customization: Custom tools & prompts (5/5 against 3/5)
  • Privacy: Fully local capable (5/5 against 3/5)
  • Model freedom: Bring-your-own / local (5/5 against 3/5)
Runs in cli, coding-agent-plugin. Works with byok, openai, anthropic, gemini, local-ollama, other-fixed.

What people want from each one

Questions people ask

Is AIHawk better than browser-use?

browser-use leads on customization and privacy and model freedom. AIHawk does not take any axis by a clear margin. AIHawk is worth picking when real browser automation — pick AIHawk when you need an agent that interacts with complex web pages (mouse, keyboard, real page rendering) and can integrate with your assistant or OpenRouter.

Which of AIHawk and browser-use keeps my code private?

AIHawk: Cloud API key (3/5). browser-use: Fully local capable (5/5).

What does each one cost to run?

AIHawk: Your OpenRouter API key or assistant-provided model. browser-use: Your LLM API key (or run free local models)..

Full profiles: feder-cr/AIHawk and browser-use/browser-use. Everything else in Browser agents.